On August 28, the U.S. Census Bureau released its annual report
on poverty, income inequality, and the number of Americans with
health insurance. The report announces good news: In 2006, a
growing economy increased the median family income and lowered the
poverty rate. Furthermore, income inequality did not statistically
increase.
More importantly, the Census Bureau used a new, more accurate
measure of income inequality. The Census Bureau divides the number
of households into quintiles which each contain a fifth of the
total households. While these quintiles have an equal number of
households, they do not have an equal number of persons. The new
measure, called "equivalence-adjusted income," partially corrects
for household size.
To further improve the accuracy of its annual report, the Census
Bureau should: (1) ensure that quintiles have an equal number of
persons instead of equal households, and (2) measure after-tax,
after-transfer income instead of money income. Accounting for
redistributive policies such as the income tax and Food Stamps
would give a better idea of the resources available to different
households.
Good News in the Numbers
The report shows that median family income increased by .7 percent
in 2006-from $47,845 to $48,201. With the unemployment rate below 5
percent and more Americans working, the poverty rate fell from 12.7
percent to 12.3 percent, the lowest the poverty rate has been since
2002. The Census Bureau also determined that income inequality is
statistically unchanged by measuring the amount of income going to
each quintile.[1]
The average income for each quintile group increased. The bottom
quintile increased by more than 3 percent and the top quintile
increased by 2 percent. The amount of income needed to reach the
top quintile increased as well-from $94,712 to $97,032 (in
2006-CPI-RS dollars).
A Different Measure of Inequality
The report acknowledged that not all households are the same size.
It confirms Heritage Foundation analysis that households in the
bottom quintile are smaller than households in other quintile
groups.[2] The report states that the lower quintile
has a higher share of single-person households as well as smaller
families, which are usually single-parent families. Expenses differ
for households based on their size and their number of children. To
reflect the realities of these differing expenses, the Census
Bureau calculated income inequality using a measure called
"equivalence-adjusted income."
This improved measure partially accounts for the smaller
households in the bottom quintiles and, therefore, indicates that
there is less inequality than indicated by the previous method.
According to the new measure, the bottom quintile earned 3.7
percent of total income, compared with 3.4 percent using the
previous measure. The share of income earned by the top quintile,
which has the most people, fell from 50.5 percent to 49.4 percent.
The second and middle quintiles gained income while the fourth
quintile lost income.[3] The findings are not surprising; the top
quintiles are more likely to have married families with
children-and thus more population and workers-than the bottom
quintiles.
Taxes Not Included
The report looks only at money income, which leaves out taxes and
also other benefits from government programs like Food Stamps. For
example, income taxes take money away from a household, and
programs like the Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC) increase other
households' income. Some programs-like Food Stamps-offer in-kind
benefits that a household can use to purchase specific items like
food. Other programs assist low-income households in areas like
housing, energy, and health. For these reasons, it would be more
accurate to measure the resources available to a household by
including these factors in the calculations.
Census studies that are released after this report will include
some of these transfers and taxes, which will lower inequality in
those reports. The Census Bureau should give more weight to this
data in its annual report, because programs that give non-cash
benefits are an increasingly popular way to battle poverty and
redistribute income. EITC, one of the most expensive redistributive
programs, costs $40 billion a year.
The 2005 Census report that measured disposable income lowered
the Gini coefficient from .45 to .418.[4] The share of income going to
the top quintile fell from 50.34 to 47.28, while the share of
income in the bottom quintile increased from 3.42 to 4.42. These
are large changes and show the importance of methodology in
measuring and counting income.
Conclusion
The Census report brings good news: Poverty declined and income
increased in 2006. Median family income increased to its highest
level except for the peak of the previous business cycle in 1999
and 2000. The number of households reporting income of less than
$10,000 declined, while the number of households reporting more
than $100,000 increased. Families are becoming richer in today's
economy.
The attempt by the Census Bureau to adjust for the different
household sizes in the various quintiles is an important step in
producing better analysis. The top quintile contains 20 percent of
the nation's households but has approximately a quarter of the
population. As a result, the top quintile has a larger share of
income because it has more people and workers. The Census's use of
a new measure to account for this ("equivalence-adjusted income")
paints a more accurate picture of income inequality.
The Census Bureau should include post-tax and transfer
calculations in its next report on income and poverty. By better
capturing disposable income, these factors would reveal an even
lower level of income inequality in the United States. The Census
report refutes the notion that "the rich are getting richer and the
poor are getting poorer." Instead, all quintiles are growing
wealthier with more money income.
Rea S. Hederman,
Jr., is Senior Policy Analyst in the Center for Data Analysis
at The Heritage Foundation.
[1]
Another measure of inequality is the GINI coefficient, which
estimates the distribution of income across the entire population.
The GINI coefficient increased slightly from .469 to .47 in the
latest report.
[3] The
effect on inequality as measured by the Gini coefficient is also
quite large. The Gini coefficient decreased from .47 to .454 after
accounting for taxes and transfers.